Washington, DC, 1999.
Preceding element provides place and date of transcription only.
For more information about this text and this American Memory collection, refer to accompanying matter.
The National Digital Library Program at the Library of Congress makes digitized historical materials available for education and scholarship.
This transcription is intended to have an accuracy of 99.95 percent or greater and is not intended to reproduce the appearance of the original work. The accompanying images provide a facsimile of this work and represent the appearance of the original.
The Democratic party is my dread. The Republican party is my hope. What is this party of which I am so much afraid? I need not say that it is not the original Democratic party—the party of my childhood and youth. That was a worthy party—a party for human rights and human equality. It was the reform party of its day. It favored universal sufferage and the abolition of imprisonment for debt, and many other beneficient changes. But this modern Democratic party—this degenerate Democratic party—is very unlike the original Democratic party. It is utterly unworthy of the name, it has so falsley, not to say knavishly, assumed. It had, for many years before our accursed rebellion, sympathized with and served the slave power of our land. Hence, when a dozen years ago, that mighty power became so infatuated as to fall upon our nation with the purpose of breaking it up entirely and forever, it found the Democratic party ready to help carry this malignant purpose into effect. Indeed, but for the well-known pro-slavery spirit of that party, the rebellion would not have been. It was the slave power's reliance on that spirit and on the impliedly, if not in fact expressly, promised aid of tens of thousands of Northern Democratic troops, which supplied what that power lacked of encouragement and boldness to plunge into the rebellion. When speaking of this degenerate Democratic party, I, of course, do not include in it the thousands of loyal men who, on the breaking out of the rebellion, forsook it and espoused the cause of their county. All the way through the war, this infamous party continued in more or less active sympathy with the slave power—ever hostile to the emancipation of the slaves, and ever hating and despising the colored race. All the war through the war, it mourned over our successes and rejoiced in our defeats. All the way through the
war, it disfavored enlistments in our army, and opposed the drafting of men to fill up our wasting ranks. All the way through it, it did what it could to weaken our national credit, both at home and abroad; and to reduce and cripple our means for carrying on the war. And since the war its conduct has been in keeping with its conduct during the war. Repudiation of our national debt, and impossibility that it could ever be paid, when not the cry upon its lips, were still the deep desire of its heart. Desparing of the literal re-enslavement of the negro, it went for heaping upon him as much of other injustice and cruelty as was possible. It refused him the right to vote and to be educated. To this day it persists in refusing him his full measure of civil rights and his equality before the law. Worst and most satanic of all, it opposes all effectual legislation for suppressing these Southern associations that whip and hang and shoot thousands of innocent blacks, and not a few innocent white men also, who dare stand up for justice to these innocent blacks. Let me here say that nothing surprises and alarms me more than the softened tone in which this hell-born Ku-Kluxism is now spoken of in certain quarters where, until quite recently it was denounced with the utmost vehemence. How great the change at this point, in even the New York
Tribune!
Does it but reflect a change in its former eminent editor? How sad, if so! This and a few other newspapers, styling themselves “Liberal Republican,” (alas, they are quite too liberal toward this superlative wickedness!) continued, until within a few months, to inveigh against Ku-Kluxism as the most horrid of all crimes of earth. But now, these newspapers would have us believe that Ku-Kluxism was only a little and short lived affair, which has already passed away, leaving peace, harmony and love to supply its place. I admit that there is just now a lull in the storm, but the storm is not yet ended. I admit that just now, the outbreaks of this matchless wickedness are less frequent, but there are still thousands upon thousands of men and women who are in constant dread of their recurrence. Let President Grant, who so faithfully executes the laws against Ku-Kluxism, withdraw his repressing hand for only a single week, and the flames of hell would again burst out there as furiously as ever, and the whip and halter and bullet be again as busy as ever. It is true that thirty-six persons convicted of Ku-Klux crimes, were sent a few days ago to the Albany penitentiary, and that hundreds and more, nearly thousands of others are now under indictment for such crimes; but the spirit of Ku-Kluxism will not die out so long as the Democratic party exists to sympathize with that spirit. Let us not be deceived by the representation that Ku-Kluxism is confined to the “low whites” of the South. Many of the influential Southern Democrats are involved in it. No small proof of this is that not a few of them fled the country as soon as President Grant undertook to enforce the laws against the murderous scoundrels. No wonder that he is unpopular with these scoundrels, and that they
As you are aware, I felt so kindly toward the South, as to be from the very first in favor of universal amnesty. When, however, the reign of Ku-Kluxism set in, I paused, and doubted whether that portion of our country, which breeds and cherishes such monsters, should receive any more unmerited favors. Heartily did I concur with the motion of our old neighbor, Senator Nye, that the candidates for amnesty be required to purge themselves by their oaths of all participation in Ku-Kluxism.
Such, my neighbors, as I have described it, is the Democratic party. But what occasion had I for describing it? The occasion is the present rekindling of its zeal and renewing of its efforts to get the reins of Government once more into its own hands. But by all that is precious in justice and mercy the Republican party must be kept in power; and by all that is abhorrent in oppression and cruelty and murder the Democratic party must be kept out of power. It is said, however, that the Democratic party has been kept out of power a dozen years, and that it is now time to forgive it and to let it try its hand at ruling again. No, it is not! When then will it be time? Never! Never!! What, not if it repent? It cannot repent. It has sinned too long and too deeply to be capable of repentance. It cannot rise up out of the bottomless depths of its political wickedness. As that generation of Israelites which rebelled against Heaven, was shut out from the promised land, so must this generation of impenitent Democrats of rebellion-favoring Democrats, of negro-hating, negro-whipping, negro-hanging Democrats be forever shut out of power. Time enough will it be for the Democracy to come again into power, when the present Democrats (the youngsters excepted) are all dead. Thankful should our Democrats be that the penalty of their crimes fall but upon themselves and not upon their children also. Thankful should they be that under our merciful Constitution there can be no bill of attainder—no disqualifying of children because of the crimes of their parents.
Sad day would it be for the negro if the impenitent, unchanged, and unchangeable Democratic party should come again into the ascendant! God forbid that it shall ever come! Ku-Kluxism, now restrained and in process of extinction by the action of the righteous and merciful Republican party, would then reappear to repeat its enormities. Whoever reads the newspapers cannot fail to see that the chief argument, which the Democratic party relies on to rally opposition to the Republican party, is the protection from Ku-Kluxism that the Republican party is affording to the negro.
But may not the Democratic party be allowed to put up and vote for Republicans? Yes! but Republicans should, as a general thing, pause long before voting for them. But suppose that party puts up for President so pronounced and eminent a Republican as Horace Greeley—cannot Republicans consistently vote for him? Certainly not. For his election would as surely be the success of the Democratic party as the election of President Grant will be the success of the Republican party. The election of Mr. Greeley will not turn the Democratic party into a Republican party—but it will turn him into a Democrat—not, I trust, in? one of the worst type—but still into a Democrat. In anticipation of merely his nomination he talked differently about the tariff from what he had been wont to do; and, instead of continuing to uphold the President's hands in his warfare against Ku-Kluxism, he joined himself to those who would palsy them. He had now ten words against the “carpet-baggers” where he had one against the Ku-Klux. No, Mr. Greeley's election would not assimilate the Democratic party to him, but him to it. So it has ever been in such cases—and how, with his kindly and obliging spirit, can he prove an exception? I do not say that Mr. Greeley will set out to be a Democrat; and I admit that he may be largely insensible of the progress of his change. Nevertheless, whether consciously or unconsciously, he will be moulded, and this too, at no very slow rate, into harmony with the general views and policies of this great party, which, as seductively as flatteringly places him at its head. But what if Mr. Greeley should, notwithstanding his candid??y and election, remain miraculously unchanged? It does not follow that his election would not be the success of the Democratic party. The President is not all the Government. Congress is far more
nearly all of it; and Mr. Greeley's election would be quite likely to result in a Democratic Congress. Many of these seceding Republicans will sell their votes to Democratic candidates in exchange for Democratic votes for Mr. Greeley. Unless human nature shall change, the sympathy between these seceding Republicans and the Democratic party will, all the land over, ripen into open coalitions. The nomination of Mr. Greeley by the Democratic party—a nomination to be consummated by the Baltimore ??vention—is, in effect, a scheme to draw off by this use of his name enough. Republicans to turn the scale in favor of of Democratic ascendency. I have not spoken to dispa??? Mr. Greeley. I have no sympathy with the defamation and abuse of
We now turn to the Republican party. At the time it came into being (considerably less than twenty years ago) the Democratic party was sunk into a dead conservatism, and into the basest servant of the slave power. The Whig party became the basis of the Republican party, notwithstanding it bore quite too much resemblance to the Democratic party. Happily, however, the Whig party allowed itself to be leavened by the handful of old uncompromising Abolitionists. In this wise was the Republican party constituted, and the condition of its continued existence and power is that it shall continue to be a reform party. Grandly did it begin its reformatory career. It fought for the life of the nation, and saved it; it fought against the guilty rebels of the South and the more guilty rebels of the North, and conquered both; it fought against slavery, and killed it; it fought for the rights of the black man and won them. And it did all this, not only without the help of the Democratic party, but in the face of its determined and unrelenting opposition. Its work is not yet done. What is lacking in the civil rights of the black man it must hasten to supply. I speak not here of social rights. They must take care of themselves. The laws have nothing to do with them.
Another Presidential election is at hand. Whom shall we vote for? In the light of what we have said, we cannot vote for candidates of the Democratic party, however worthy they may be. Grant and Wilson are my own choice—first, because they are the candidates of the Republican party and the upholders of its righteous principles; and second, because they are wise and honest men and have especial claims to our votes. Wilson is eminently a friend of the laboring man and the black man. Ably and faithfully, and for many years has he fought their battles, and they will rejoice in this opportunity to vote for him. Admirably qualified is Mr. Wilson to take President Grant's place should it be made vacant by resignation or death.
Emphatically true is it that there are special reasons and of the weightiest nature for voting for President Grant. He saved our country in time of war. He blesses it in time of peace. After a long series of successes and defeats, and in which there were quite as many defeats as successes, and when our country was beginning to doubt of her ultimate success, General Grant was summoned to the supreme command of our armies. His policy of persistence—of continuing to hew his way on the same line, though it should take all summer long to reach victory—was much censured by General Cluseret and other distinguished military men. Nevertheless, it prevailed—he won the final battle. General Lee surrendered, and our divided nation then became one.
By the way, the charge of General Grant's severity towards the South is very unjust. The easy terms on which he allowed Lee to surrender, prove the kindness and generosity of his heart towards the South. I said that he serves us well in time of peace also. He preserves us in amity with all nations. He pursues a friendly and peaceful policy towards the poor misguided Indian; and, though Ku-Kluxism is still countenanced by the still pro-slavery and still negro-hating spirit of the Democratic party, he is fast overcoming it, and bringing its crimes to an end. The vast debt, which the slavery and Democracy-prompted war brought upon the nation, is fast disappearing under General Grant's Presidency, and this, too, while our taxes are rapidly diminishing.
But it is said that President Grant should retire at the end of his term, and give place to another. Common sense, however, argues that his having been a good President once is a strong reason why he should be President twice. Thus did common sense argue, when it re-elected Washington, the first savior of his country. Thus did it argue when it re-elected Lincoln, the second savior of his country; and thus does it now argue when it is about to re-elect Grant, the third savior of his country.
It is said, too, that President Grant has made mistakes. In beautifully modest terms does he himself confess it and hope to learn from experience. All men make mistakes. Not even Presidents are exempted from the aphorism that “to err is human.” Some of his appointments
Another charge against the President is that during the Presidency he has accepted presents. The charge is untrue—though, in saying so I do not admit that there would necessarily have been moral wrong in his accepting them. It is true presents were made to him as well as to other successful Generals to express the gratitude and admiration of those who made them; and it is also true that to single him out for blame in the case proves that General Grant is a basely persecuted man. No other General is complained of for doing what he did; and in the case of no other General held to be other than entirely innocent and proper.
What, however, shall we do with Mr. Sumner's speech against President Grant? We cannot make light of it and toss it aside—for Mr Sumner is, at once, both a great and good man. No one has spoken more frequently or more powerfully for his country, and especially for the colored race. He lives to day in the true American heart; and many generations will pass away before his honored and beloved name shall be forgotten. How shall we account for it that such a man should dislike President Grant, whom we should all thank and love and honor, and dislike him more than any other man dislikes him? Some say he is impelled by revenge for not being put again in the Committee on Foreign Relations. This is not true; for long before that he had revealed to myself, and doubtless to others also, his intense dislike of the President. May we not look for the origin (not the extent) of this intense dislike to the different tastes and habits of the two men? Mr. Sumner was born in affluence and bred in elegance. He was moulded in some of the best schools of America and Europe, and by intercourse with some of the most cultured minds in both, he became one of the most accomplished of orators and statesmen. President Grant, on the contrary, was a poor boy and a laboring man. It is true that for this Mr. Sumner would not despise, nor at all undervalue him. Nevertheless, and notwithstanding the great intellectual power manifested by the President, Mr. Sumner would be one of the last men to see in him fitness for statesmanship or for the Presidency. Hence Mr. Sumner, instead of interpreting the President in favorable lights, and with a generous spirit, has been more disposed to follow his steps with criticism and censure. This has become such a habit with him that now, at last, we see him, as in this bitter speech, hunting for occasions against the President where his candor and dignity should not have allowed him to hunt for them, and finding them where only his disordered vision could find them.
Mr. Sumner speaks of President Grant's insult to Frederick Douglass, and through him to the colored race. The insult exists but in Mr. Sumner's imagination. Certain it is that Mr. Douglass is insensible of it, for he is still the uncomplaining and warm friend of the President. Mr. Sumner says that the President in inviting the San Domingo Commissioners to dine with him forgot Mr. Douglas. But Mr. Douglass, though Mr. Sumner speaks of him as one of the Commissioners, was not one of them. Like General Sigel he had served the Commission in the capacity of Assistant Secretary, and like him he was not with the Commissioners (Senator Wade, Dr. Howe, and President White,) when they called “informally” upon the President, and were “informally” invited to dine with him.
Let us, my neighbors, instead of disparaging President Grant, and dwelling on the errors of his Administration, be thankful that he makes us so wise and safe a President. Very foolish is the man who instead of enjoying the light and heat of the sun spends all his days in mousing after and magnifying the spots upon it.
I close with saying that we must have Grant for our President a few years longer. The anti-slavery battle is not yet fought out, nor will it be so long as a single shred of Ku-Kluxism remains, nor so long as there are persons who are deprived, on account of their complexions, of so much as one civil right. Let it not be said that the negro, having gained most of his rights, is content to live without the remainder. The more nearly he gains them all, the more discontented and grieved will he be if any one of them is still withheld from him. Such is human nature.
“The pris'ner sent to breathe fresh air,
And taste of liberty again.
Would mourn were he condemned to wear
One link of all his former chain.”
EXTRACT FROM
An Eloquent and Forcible Speech,
BY HON. HENRY WILSON,
Delivered in Richmond, Va., July 24, 1872.
Mr. Chairman and Fellow-citizens:
I am glad of the honor and the privilege of following Frederick Douglass here on the soil of Virginia. For more than thirty years I have listened to his words in favor of equal and impartial liberty for all men in America. He has stood on the platform in our own land and in other lands and pleaded the cause of his race with consummate ability. I welcome him to the stump that he has taken for the first time, and I congratulate him. He has uttered to-day a few grand, central ideas, immortal truths, truths to go into the heart and guide the head, and, men of Virginia, of every race, I commend his words to your thoughtful consideration. He has said to-day, what I believe to be true, that while he hated slavery, he never hated the masters. In that sentiment, I, who have been an anti-slavery man for thirty-seven years, most heartily concur. Misunderstood, misrepresented, maligned through long and weary years, the veteran anti-slavery men of the North, Garrison, Smith, Tappan, Whittier, and the long list of noble men and women who carried the ark of the covenant of liberty in America for so many years, loved the slave, and they loved the master, too. Thanks be to the Almighty and to the new race of politicians that came into power with Abraham Lincoln in 1861, and to the heroic valor of brave men on many a field, there is no longer a slave upon American soil. [Great applause.]
The ideas, the principles, the measures, the policy of the Republican party are stronger far to-day than the Republican party itself; and they will be stronger to-morrow than they are to-day, and why? Because they are eternal truths, older than man, existing before Adam walked the Garden of Eden, and they will live as long as the throne of Almighty God shall last. The Republican party occupies to-day, and has occupied for years, in a portion of this country, a position harmonious with the doctrines of Christianity. Every Christian man or woman in its ranks could go into his or her closet, read God's Holy Word, and on bended knees invoke the blessing of Him whose hand rules the stars and heaves the pulses of the deep.
I see there are men here to-day who are of that proud race of ours that assumes to be the master race in the world. I have a few words to say to you; and I say to you frankly that Republicans want to take you by the hand and welcome you into the ranks of the Republican party of the United States. [Applause.] I say to you in the sincerity of my heart that the Republican party, three and a half millions strong this day, is able to carry and will carry the national election by an overwhelming majority. I ask you to come with us now, you who declare your readiness to vote for a Republican—you who have accepted the Cincinnati platform. Just come in at the open door, for you know that he who climbs in by any other way is a thief and a robber. [Applause and laughter.]
What we want in the country is quiet, order and peace.
Peace with liberty, peace with equality, peace with justice between man and man, between him who lives in a palace and him who lives in a cabin. Let us have peace; let us have fraternal feeling; let us vie with each other in maintaining in our heart of hearts the cause of complete liberty and perfect equality. Let us maintain together the cause of humanity, and develop the mighty resources that God has given us for human power and human happiness in America. * * * *
Gentlemen, there are those who hold up the idea to you that the administration of General Grant is humiliating and oppressing the men of the South. I say here, and now, that whoever utters a word of that character misunderstands the condition of affairs and misconceives the purposes of the administration, and misrepresents the administration. The legislation of Congress has all of it been in good faith; in kindness, in charity to the reconstructed of your State and the States that were in the rebellion, on the basis of liberty and equality to all men. We hear much now said about the Ku-Klux law, and it comes from men who are shouting for the election of Horace Greeley. In the winter of 1871 there came to us intelligence of cruel and murderous and bloody deeds. We had information that made humanity shudder. We had information direct from the Ku-Klux organizations, from men who were present when the foulest deeds were perpetrated in portions of the country. In March, 1871, the Senate thought we had better stay in Washington to protect the people of the country against midnight assassination. The House thought we had better go home. There was a struggle for several days. During that time Mr. Greeley came to Washington. He was a flame of fire in favor of legislation. He telegraphed from Washington a leader for his paper, taking the ground that a country that could not protect its citizens against such crimes ought to be swept from God's earth. Under the persuasionTribune,
the President asked Congress to pass such a measure, and his request was complied with, and the Ku-Klux law was passed. That law has been executed; executed, I hope, in its spirit—mercifully. If it has not been, then the intentions of those who passed the law and the spirit of the act itself have not been carried out. I say to you here, gentlemen, that that legislation has saved life, has repressed crime, has broken the bands of the Ku-Klux organization; and when it shall clearly appear that that organization is broken, that peace, security, and order have come, then I would stop the prosecutions; I would pardon most of those who committed offenses, and bid them sin no more.
I stand here to-day and am ready to say that since the year 1855, up to this hour, the Republican party, on every leading issue, idea, principle, and measure before the country, measured by patriotism, liberty, justice, humanity, development, culture, and Christian civilization, has been right all the time.
I am not here to misrepresent or belittle the Democratic party. But it was placed in a false position many years ago, and it has been on the wrong side for the last twenty years. In 1868 it adopted a platform denouncing reconstruction measures, and proclaiming in favor of their overthrow. In 1872 it goes into a National Convention, abandons its constituency, its character, and indorses doctrines that it has denounced as unconstitutional, anti-American, oppressive, despotic. Were you right in 1868? Are you honest now, and do you mean what you say? Holy Writ tells us that a tree is known by its fruit; that man is to be judged by his deeds. Your fruits are all over this land. They were on the statute books in language of oppression. They were in the war four years. After the war they were in the legislation concerning the freedmen of the South, so that when the historian shall record it, it will be the blackest chapter in the history of the Republic.
Now if you mean to support the Cincinnati platform, take my advice and at once prepare yourselves to give a hearty and sincere support to what has been done.
If you mean what you say just commence with earnest work for liberty. Take it into your hearts. Act up to your faith. Protect the poor and the weak; lift up the lowly, and make old Virginia what she might have been, one of the greatest Commonwealths of the American Union.
Now, gentlemen, do this work this autumn. You cannot carry the country this year. Your confession comes too late. [Laughter.] You ought to have begun your policy at least two years ago. You ought to have brought forth fruits meet for repentance. We cannot trust you yet; but after we have elected General Grant, as we surely will, and have carried Congress, then, gentlemen, you will have four years to show by your deeds the sincerity of your declarations at Baltimore. [Laughter and applause.]
There are some who tell us that the Republican party has done its work. As I regard it, the Republican party has yet its greatest, its grandest, its crowning work to do—a work greater than abolishing slavery; a work greater than putting down the rebellion; a work greater than lifting a race up to civil rights; a work greater than making five millions of men citizens of the United States, and that work is to change the heart of the Democratic party of the United States. [Applause and laughter.]
Well now, gentlemen, you seem to show evidence of being convicted, but you are not converted yet, that is sure. [Renewed laughter.] You are on probation now, and you will have to stay out until after the next election. And it will do you a great deal of good. As you have a long and sinful life to repent of before we put the government in your hands, we want to give you time enough for mature consideration and perfect repentance. [Applause, and cries of good.]
It is not necessary for me here to say anything in vindication of this administration. The adoption of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments, the civil rights bill, and all its kindred measures, show that it is on the side of liberty and equality. [Cheers.] It has shown itself to be always on the side of patriotism, for whatever faults this administration or the Republican party may have committed, one thing is true—it has always been faithful to the old flag and stood by it. It has been in favor of protecting the rights of American citizens at home and abroad, and it has made treaties with the leading European powers for the protection of those rights. In a word, measured by the great standard by which God measures public men and political organizations, the Republican party stands peerless among the parties of the globe. It has gone further, stood up higher, struggled to a loftier plane than any other political party the world ever saw. [Applause.]
And there is another thing I want to speak of. It has done more for the poor men of this country, white and black, the manual laborers, more for their rights, more for their dignity, more for their honor, more for their elevation, and more for the reward of their industry than all the parties that ever existed in this country. In striking the fetters from four and a half millions of black men and women, it did more for the poor white working men of this country, and especially those of the South, than all the parties ever did before. [Applause.]
Now, gentlemen, I must close. I appeal to you, white men and black men alike, I appeal to you all to go with us in the struggle. It is the path of patriotism, the path that the star
I say to you, my republican friends, to each one and all of you, trust in the great, grand old Republican party, with its glorious history, its sacred memories, its patriotic career, its noble men—aye, and its noble women, too. Look to God; hope on, struggle on, win a glorious victory; and dedicate our success to the good of our country, and of all men, of every race and color. [Applause.]
LETTER FROM HON. JAMES G. BLAINE.
POLITICAL FELLOWSHIP OF JEFFERSON DAVIS, HORACE GREELEY, ROBERT TOOMBS, AND CHARLES SUMNER.
Hon. Charles Sumner, U. S. Senator:
Dear Sir:
Your letter published in the papers of this morning, will create profound pain and regret among your former political friends throughout New England. Your power to injure General Grant was exhausted in your remarkable speech in the Senate. Your power to injure yourself was not fully exercised until you announced an open alliance with the Southern secessionists in their efforts to destroy the Republican party of the nation.
I have but recently read with much interest the circumstantial and minute account given by you in the fourth volume of your Works, of the manner in which you were struck down in the Senate Chamber in 1856 for defending the rights of the negro. The Democratic party throughout the South, and according to your own showing to some extent in the North also, approved that assault upon you. Mr. Toombs, of Georgia, openly announced his approval of it in the Senate, and Jefferson Davis, four months after its occurrence, wrote a letter to South Carolina in fulsome eulogy of Brooks
for having so nearly taken your life.
It is safe to say that every man in the South who rejoiced over the attempt to murder you was afterward found in the Rebel conspiracy to murder the nation. It is still safer to say that every one of them who survives is to-day your fellow-laborer in support of Horace Greeley. In 1856 he would indeed have been a rash prophet who predicted your fast alliance sixteen years after with Messrs. Toombs and Davis in their efforts to reinstate their own party in power. In all the startling mutations of American politics nothing so marvellous has ever occurred as the fellowship of ROBERT TOOMBS, JEFFERSON DAVIS, and CHARLES SUMNER in a joint effort to drive the Republican party from power and hand over the Government to the practical control of those who so recently sought to destroy it.
It is of no avail for you to take refuge behind the Republican record of Horace Greeley. Conceding, for the sake of argument, (as I do not in fact believe,) that Horace Greeley would remain firm in his Republican principles, he would be powerless against the Congress that would come into power with him in the event of his election. We have had a recent and striking illustration in the case of Andrew Johnson of the inability of the President to enforce a policy, or even a measure, against the will of Congress. What more power would there be in Horace Greeley to enforce a Republican policy against a Democratic Congress than than there was in Andrew Johnson to enforce a Democratic policy against a Republican Congress? And besides Horace Greeley has already, in his letter of acceptance, taken ground practically against the Republican doctrine so often enforced by yourself, of the duty of the Natianal Government to secure the rights of every citizen to protection of life, person and property. In Mr. Greeley's letter accepting the Cincinnati nomination, he pleases every Ku-Klux villain in the South by repeating the Democratic cant about “
local self-government,
” and inveighing in good rebel parlance against “
centralization,
” and finally declaring that “
there shall be no
FEDERAL SUBVERSION
of the internal policy of the several States and municipalities,
but that each shall be left free to enforce the rights and promote the well-being of its inhabitants BY SUCH MEANS AS THE JUDGMENT OF ITS OWN PEOPLE SHALL PRESCRIBE.”
The meaning of all this in plain English is that no matter how the colored citizens of the South may be abused, wronged and oppressed, Congress shall not interfere for their protection, but leave them to the tender mercies of the “local self-government administered by the white rebels.” Do you as a friend to the colored man approve this position of Mr. Greeley?
You cannot forget, Mr. Sumner, how often during the late session of Congress you conferred with me in regard to the possibility of having your Civil Rights Bill passed by the House. It was introduced by your personal friend, Mr. Hooper, and nothing prevented its passage by the House, except the rancorous and factious hostility of the Democratic members. If I have correctly examined the
Globe,
the Democratic members on
seventeen different occasions
resisted the passage of the Civil Rights Bill by the Parliamentary process
Still further: the rights of the colored men in this country are secured, if secured at all, by the three great Constitutional amendments, the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth. To give these amendments full scope and effect, legislation by Congress is imperatively required, as you have so often and so eloquently demonstrated. But the Democratic party are on record in the most conspicuous manner against any legislation on the subject. It was only in the month of February last that my colleague, Mr. Peters, offered a resolution in the House of Representatives, affirming “the validity of the Constitutional amendments and of such REASONABLE legislation of Congress AS MAY BE NECESSARY to make them in their letter and spirit most effectual.” This resolution—very mild and guarded, as you will see—was adopted by 124 YEAS to 58 NAYS; ONLY EIGHT of the YEAS were Democrats; ALL the NAYS were Democrats.
The resolution of Mr. Peters was followed a week later, by one offered by Mr. Stevenson, of Ohio, as follows:
“
Resolved,
That we recognize as valid and binding all existing laws passed by Congress for the enforcement of the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth amendments of the Constitution of the United States, and for the protection of citizens in their rights under the Constitution as amended.”
On the vote upon this resolution there were 107 YEAS to 65 NAYS.
All the yeas
were Republicans, and they are now unanimous in support of President Grant. All the nays were Democrats, who are now equally unanimous in support of Mr. Greeley.
It is idle to affirm, as some Democrats did in a resolution offered by Mr. Brooks of New York, that “these amendments are valid parts of the Constitution,” so long as the same men on the same day vote that the provisions of those amendments should not be enforced by Congressional Irgislation. The amendments are but “sounding brass and tinkling cymballs” to the colored man until Congress makes them effective and practical. May more; if the rights of the colored man are left to the legislation of the Southern States, without Congressional intervention, he would under a Democratic administration be deprived of the right of suffrage in less than two years, and he would be very lucky if he escaped some form of chattel slavery or peonage. And in proof of this danger I might quote volumes of wisdom and warning from the speeches of Charles Sumner!
When, therefore, you point out to the colored men that their rights will be safe in the hands of the Democratic party, you delude and mislead them—I do not say wilfully, but none the less really. The small handful of Republicans—compared with the whole mass—who unite with yourself and Mr. Greeley in going over to the Democratic party, cannot leaven that lump of political unsoundness even if you preserve your own original principles in the contact. The administration of Mr. Greeley, therefore, should be elected, would be in the whole and in detail a Democratic Administration, and you would be compelled to go with the current or repent and turn back when too late to mend the evil you had done. Your argument that Horace Greeley does not become a Democrat by receiving Democratic votes—illustrating it by the analogy of your own election to the Senate—is hardly pertinent. The point is not what Mr. Greeley will become personally, but what will be the complexion of the great legislative branch of the Government with all its vast and controlling power. You know very well, Mr. Sumner, that if Mr. Greeley is elected President Congress is handed over to the control of the party who have persistently denied the rights of the black man. What course will you pursue towards the colored man is of small consequence after you have transferred the power of the Government to his enemy!
The colored men of this country are not as a class enlightened; but they have wonderful instincts, and when they read your letter they will know that at a great crisis in their fate you deserted them. Charles Sumner, co-operating with Jefferson Davis, is not the same Charles Sumner they have hitherto idolized—any more than Horace Greeley, cheered to the echo in Tammany Hall, is the same Horace Greeley whom the Republicans have hitherto trusted. The black men of this country will never be ungrateful for what you have done for them in the past—nor, in the bitterness of their hearts, will they ever forget that heated and blinded by personal hatred of one man you turned your back on the millions to whom in past years you have stood as a shield and bulwark of defence!
Very respectfully,
Augusta, Maine,
July 31, 1872.